I wrapped all of the routines in @{[...]} to provide the list context; that was what I'd used in the preamble tests.
I added an STss as I had indicated this morning. I decided that STmcs was going to be pretty much the same as STss, so I skipped that one. I did add an mcse which was mcs with map BLOCK replaced by map EXPR.
sub st_sort_substr { @{[ map $_->[0], sort { $a->[1] <=> $b->[1] } map [$_, substr $_, 2], @unordered ]}; } sub map_cat_substr_expr { @{[ map "a-$_", sort { $a <=> $b } map substr($_, 2), @unordered ]}; }
I saw ++swl's post. There wasn't any code there, so I guessed.
use Sort::Key 'ikeysort'; use Sort::Key::Natural 'natsort'; ... sub sort_key_integer { @{[ ikeysort { substr $_, 2 } @unordered ]}; } sub sort_key_natural { @{[ natsort @unordered ]}; }
I ran the benchmark several times; there were no major differences between runs. Here's a sample output, in the spoiler; it's getting very wide (18 subroutines now) and this post is "Re^7", so probably best viewed via the "download" link.
And here's the code:
— Ken
In reply to Re^7: How can I do a numeric sort on a substring? [Benchmark: reworked and extended]
by kcott
in thread How can I do a numeric sort on a substring?
by misterperl
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |